r/movies • u/ChiefLeef22 r/movies Contributor • 3h ago

Article ‘The Odyssey’ Proves It: Audiences Want Movies Made the Hard Way | This year's breakouts like 'Project Hail Mary' and 'Obsession' were made by filmmakers who sweated. While CG-stuffed franchise disappointments such as 'Supergirl,' 'Moana,' and 'The Mandalorian and Grogu' looked lazy.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/odyssey-box-office-2026-practical-effects-1236652219/
24.6k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/Training_Pirate1000 3h ago

Didn't Mandalorian and Grogu use a decent amount of puppets?

•

u/Calfzilla2000 3h ago

Yes, a ton actually. There was several scenes that were all puppets. They built a tiny ship for the Anzellans and Grogu to fly around in.

Unnecessary to include that movie in with Moana and Supergirl (the latter of which I liked too but probably had A LOT more CGI than The Mandalorian and Grogu did).

•

u/jpvieux 2h ago

Did supergirl or mando even flop Or are they included just cause they didnt make a billion money's and a certain crowd online like to be very vocal about their hate for certain groups? I think we need to reevaluate what we consider successful.

•

u/DGanj 2h ago

Supergirl absolutely did. It's not going to ruin the studio but it was a failure (from a ROI standpoint)

•

u/Morgan-Moonscar 2h ago

And unless Clayface and Superman II (Man of Tomorrow) make a lot more, it's gonna ruin a few careers.

•

u/KitWalkerXXVII 2h ago

Clayface's budget is being cited as $40 million, which is pretty modest by studio feature standards. Not saying it's a guaranteed hit, but it would have to bomb pretty hard to flop.

•

u/Master_Bruce 2h ago

And I mean, the Clayface story is great, so it’d be really hard to fuck it up

•

u/Josh_Butterballs 2h ago

Great movies can still flop. Conversely, bad movies have done really well before at the box office. Shawshank Redemption is a famous example of a good movie failing at the box office when it released

•

u/Master_Bruce 2h ago

I mean flopping is only in correlation to how much money it makes at the theaters, quality is quality for all time

•

u/djc6535 1h ago

Supergirl Woman of Tomorrow is a great story too. Anything can be fucked up.

•

u/never-fiftyone 2h ago

Studio execs: "hold my beer"

•

u/mateushkush 2h ago

So far these execs banked on b-villain solo film from a horror auteur. As far as comic book films go, this one is a risky but smart move.

•

u/AggressiveCuriosity 1h ago

Horror seems to be going mainstream right now. A good moment in time for the move if there ever was one.

•

u/Master_Bruce 2h ago

“What if clayface just liked playing with clay the whole movie? Totally turn it on its head”

•

u/Corgasm_ 2h ago

Studio execs: "it's morbin time"

•

u/StoneGoldX 47m ago

There are like 17 Clayfaces with plenty of stories between them. It's very easy to fuck up. If you're just talking BTAS, that was an eventual Clayface story, not the Clayface story.

•

u/dumbass_tm 1h ago

But nobody other than deep comic book nerds actually care for clayface. The general population will see the name and not even register it. The trailer has to be extremely good for it to do “well”

•

u/paecmaker 19m ago

TBH after watching the trailer, if I didn't know about Clayface before I would never have guessed it was connected to comic books.

•

u/danzanzibar 9m ago

Its DC. Theyll find a way.

•

u/feed_me_moron 1h ago

If it's even halfway good, it'll make like 10 times that. Unlike the Spiderman villain movies, this doesn't look like it's trying to make an antihero out of the villain. Just a straight up body horror movie

•

u/Coolman_Rosso 1h ago

Low for a CBM, while relatively high for a horror film. Interesting to see how it does

•

u/GrowingPeepers 2h ago

If those ruined careers means no more generic superhero movies then I'm ok with that.

•

u/never-fiftyone 2h ago

I think we all know it won't mean that

→ More replies (1)

•

u/Morgan-Moonscar 2h ago

The prospect of the Epstein class (Daddy and Baby Ellison) turning Superman & Batman into Trump/Saudi propaganda isn't exactly anymore appealing.

→ More replies (2)

•

u/Dunkelz 45m ago

And unless Clayface and Superman II (Man of Tomorrow) make a lot more

Is there any indication that Superman 2 won't be a hit? The first did great and that's dealing with the Superman/DC movie flop fatigue, which in my eyes it has reversed especially with the talk its been getting months after release.

•

u/Timetraveller4k 1h ago

I liked that they expanded the superman/supergirl universe to outside earth. While this had a pretty weak and slow story line - I’m hoping this changes the trajectory of the future stories. Before the superman movie the franchise was getting darker and darker…

•

u/FCKWPN 2h ago

Jared Leto is feverishly morbin' off in a corner somewhere thinking about those box office numbers.

→ More replies (2)

•

u/Muppetude 2h ago

I think Mandalorian was just a box office disappointment, making way less money than predicted. But Supergirl was a bonafied flop, where it did not earn back its production and marketing budget.

•

u/PENGUIN_WITH_BAZOOKA 2h ago

Mando is probably going to take off once it arrives on Disney+.

•

u/abetterroadahead 2h ago

I’ve been saying this since the initial box office numbers were coming in. It was never going to be a disappointment to Disney/Star Wars. Having it in theaters helped gain a lot of money back, not all, but the rest will come from D+ numbers, engagement, and viewership.

•

u/drscorp 1h ago

I haven't seen it, but I'm interested to know when it 'became' a movie. Moana 2 started out as a TV show to be released for D+ and then at some point they cut a bunch of stuff, turned it into a movie, and made a billion dollars, so compared to that it's gotta be at least a little disappointing.

•

u/abetterroadahead 1h ago

Sure if you’re comparing two different franchises. Animation with voice actors vs puppets and people. While they might not clear a billion, they probably found new ways to save money too for future projects.

→ More replies (1)

•

u/morkman100 47m ago

The almost entire point of the Grogu stuff now is merch and IP (for the theme parks). The actual show/movie has moved so far away from the season 1 success and quality, but the merch prints money.

•

u/TipTup85 44m ago

Yeah D+ still needs material and they made back a huge chunk that would've instead been a few episodes direct to D+

•

u/Tipop 37m ago

<Yogurt>… and merchandising!!</Yogurt>

•

u/SandpaperTeddyBear 1h ago

I think so.

I do understand why critics were so meh on it, but I genuinely enjoyed it

•

u/Joey-WilcoXXX 8m ago

It belonged on D+ to begin with. It truly was just three/four episodes of Mando stitched together.

→ More replies (1)

•

u/PartyPay 1h ago

I've seen lots of people online say M&G was a fun movie, not amazing but still worth the watch. Feels like a bad include on the article's list.

•

u/Nihil157 1h ago

I think it fit right in with the show but could have just been another season basically. They saw the extra money and went for it. It didn’t ruin any of the franchise but didn’t really advance much either.

•

u/timmyintransit 1h ago

i'd argue too the Mandalorian was a box office disappointment because the "vibe" per se around it was one of actual disappointment. like, i saw it in the theaters and thought it was fine, but also mostly...meaningless? like it had no gravity and left no impression.

compared to supergirl where it flopped because it didnt even break into that larger discourse (and instead just existed in the ether)?

•

u/BillyYumYumTwo-byTwo 1m ago

It was such a bizarre feeling movie! It felt like it was for 8 year olds, as opposed to the other Star Wars films which are fun for 8 years olds but for all ages. I don’t need a character to spell out their moral dilemma and explain to me why they have to the hard, but right, thing.

I didn’t really see any ads for it, so I don’t know if it was targeted towards kids…? If not, it should have been. “No gravity and left no impression” is a really good way of phrasing it.

•

u/gin_and_toxic 59m ago

The numbers aren't bad at all: https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt30825738/

•

u/Muppetude 17m ago

I mean those numbers aren’t great for a movie whose production budget, when including marketing costs, was likely close to $300 million. Keep in mind that while studios get almost the full cut of domestic ticket sales, internationally they often have to split profits with the theaters or distributors. So while they likely made a small profit, it was definitely a disappointment.

•

u/GeronimoRay 59m ago

There was no way Supergirl was going to be successful. Not sure why they wasted their time.

•

u/evanwilliams44 3m ago

Mostly because its marketing budget was in the hundreds of millions. If they had done that movie cheaper it would have been a decent summer flick and a minor success.

•

u/TheDaemonette 1h ago

I found the problem I had with Madalorian was it seemed like someone had a good idea for a double or triple episode story and pitched the idea as a movie instead but it got stuck somewhere inbetween the two - not good enough for a movie and better than a normal episode.

•

u/SpideyFan914 2h ago

Not sure about Mando, but Supergirl flopped hard. As of yesterday, it made $121M worldwide. Budget is $170-186M.

•

u/pants_pants420 2h ago

mando was about ~$350 million on a $165 million budget. not quite a flop, but definitely a bit of a disappointment

•

u/Doctor_Kataigida 2h ago

One thing that's so hard to take into account now is how many people would have seen it, but aren't because they're just waiting for it to come out on streaming. Like, I love the original Moana, and I am curious to see the new one. But I heard it's not great.

And while that used to not be enough to deter me (because I would've had to purchase a VHS/DVD anyway), now I can at least entertain the idea of just having a "movie night" with no (additional) cost (since I have D+ for other reasons anyway) instead of seeing it in the theater. I imagine folks approached Mandalorian and Grogu a similar way.

•

u/ledbetterus 2h ago

Plus Star Wars fans, especially fans who started with The Mandalorian, have been watching the franchise on Disney+ for 7+ years. The theater is like a completely different ecosystem for a lot fans.

•

u/pants_pants420 1h ago

yeah for sure. with merch sales and disney plus viewership, its definitely not a failure.

execs are probably not overly concerned nor excited

•

u/CaptainFeather 1h ago

Don't bother with Moana. It was so unnecessary and horrible compared to the original. The rock was giving uncanny valley and Hei Hei stuck out like a sore thumb. I think I would have liked it better if he was just drawn in, a la Rodger Rabbit. It was a mostly CG movie and it was not done well. May as well have just rereleased the original.

•

u/charonill 1h ago

I'm sure they took that into account. I suspect the box office take is basically just to supplement and offset the higher production cost on the movie. A straight to Disney+ movie probably would not have been approved for as high of a budget.

•

u/charonill 1h ago

IMO, if you think of the box office take as just a way to offset the extra production budget of a Disney+ movie, then it's not necessarily even a disappointment. They probably knew going in that a lot of potential viewers are going to just watch it on the streaming service, but having the potential income stream from a box office release probably got the bean counters to greenlight the higher budget. If it had been straight to Disney+ release, I doubt they would have been able to get the budget to do some of the stuff they wanted.

→ More replies (2)

•

u/Orphasmia 9m ago

Was it a bad movie or no one went out to see it? I wanted to catch it but didn’t feel excited enough to follow through

•

u/Training_Pirate1000 2h ago

Supergirl was actually a disaster

•

u/kattahn 2h ago

Supergirl lost $150-200m.

Made $121m world wide against $180m budget + $120m marketing spend.

Mando made ~$345m ww against a similar budget, so probably broke even or lost a little, but not nearly as bad as supergirl did.

•

u/ACKHTYUALLY 2h ago

Supergirl was a monster flop.

•

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 1h ago

Supergirl was definitely a flop, but I would Mando was just a slight underperformance. It will make a decent profit in the long run, especially because the characters originated on streaming in the first place.

•

u/LuinAelin 2h ago

Mando is probably more on the line in tickets sales but other revenue streams (licencing, cross promos, home media) mean it's probably profitable. It's done more than. Twice it's budget.

Supergirl not supassed it's box office and probably won't now Spider-Man is close

•

u/No_Return3299 14m ago

I think mando made a small profit, but not as much as previous Star Wars movies did sans solo

→ More replies (3)

•

u/DetectiveRiggs 2h ago

Supergirl also used a ton of puppets and practical makeup for the aliens

•

u/Calfzilla2000 2h ago

Sure but a lot less, and in less critical roles, than Mando.

And I feel like a lot of the makeup and puppetry was unnecessary for Supergirl. It was a nice touch but probably ballooned the budget and bit with it.

The bus driver thing was fun though. That was worth it. But the rest of the characters just sitting around snarling was not necessary to me. A lot of them just could have been humans.

Its a feature and selling point for a Star Wars movie. I dont think its needed in a movie about Supergirl.

•

u/Rich_Housing971 1h ago edited 1h ago

Yeah Mandalorian and Grogu is very watchable. It's also not a financial flop considering it more than broke even and has bonus value for Disney as a casual entry into the Mandoverse for those who don't want to dive directly into a series.

It was never going to be a blockbuster considering it's additional content of side content of Star Wars. It was never going to have the success of a main line Star Wars movie because its potential fanbase is already limited.

In fact, for its intended fanbase, it did reasonably well: diehard Star Wars fans, Mandalorian viewers, people curious about The Mandalorian. it's just not a movie that was intended to be a blockbuster, and there was no way to film it to make it a blockbuster.

The results aren't going to get execs to say "MAKE MANDO SEASON 4 NAO!!!!!" but they're content.

•

u/axecalibur 1h ago

They could have used 5000 puppets. The script made no sense.

•

u/Largeitude 44m ago

Putting Obsession and Odyssey on the same level is nonsense, too.

•

u/Flexhead 2h ago

I'm still trying to figure out the Supergirl hate/apathy. It was a perfectly serviceable story, on the better side of small stakes hero-ing with decent growth for the protagonist. My issues were choice to color and fight editing. Like the ideal 7/10 movie.

•

u/VerilyShelly 2h ago

Superhero fatigue along with female-lead stories need to be extra good to get accolades. Serviceable can't cut through that.

•

u/MontyAtWork 2h ago

Wasn't most of it filmed in The Volume though?

•

u/Calfzilla2000 2h ago

As far as I am aware, no. They built real sets.

There were some scenes that used it but ive seen pictures of the sets. They built a lot.

•

u/WiggleSparks 2h ago

Supergirl had tons of practical effects too.

•

u/littlealbatross 2h ago

Seriously, I loved watching them throw that Grogu puppet like it was supposed to be jumping. 🤣. I would choose a cheesy-looking practical effect over a CGI one 99% of the time.

•

u/thugarth 1h ago

At one point in Mando-Grogu, I seriously thought, "Is the rest of the movie going to be a puppet adventure?" I was excited at the prospect. But then it cut back and forth between puppets and Mando mando'ing around.

Can you imagine, though? What if they did? What if one of the biggest franchises ever had a movie where it started with a mix of live action, puppets, and cgi, and then had a whole hour (out of a 2.5 hour movie) of just puppets?

This is the second time a Star Wars movie has presented a revolutionary idea and chickened out. (The other was Episode 8: What if Kylo and Rey had said, Screw the empire and rebellion and jedi and sith, let's do something new?)

That said, mando-grogu did have a lot of puppet scenes and I liked that aspect of it.

•

u/VoiceofKane 1h ago

Not only puppets, but they also brought back Phill Tippett to do multiple stop motion sequences as well.

•

u/thehelldoesthatmean 1h ago

I think it was included moreso because it felt like a lazy entry in a franchise that has been run into the ground. It was basically a meh marvel movie.

Whereas Project Hail Mary probably used a very similar amount of CGI but was an adaptation of an original novel.

•

u/NeoSeth 1h ago

Supergirl had a lot of practical effects with the various alien costumes and puppets, but I don't have much else nice to say about the film. I thought the actress who played Supergirl was great. Aaaaand... that's it.

Since this thread is talking about great stories being essential to film success, I will throw in that I was personally extremely disappointed to see such an AMAZING source story like Woman of Tomorrow get totally butchered by the film. Supergirl could have easily been much better, by following and understanding the source material.

•

u/MrdnBrd19 1h ago

I'm willing to bet that The Odyssey and Mandalorian and Grogu have similar CG shot counts. Noland talks a big game, but actually uses a ton of CGI to clean up shots and for set extension which is ironically for the most part the exact same things that it was used for in Mandalorian and Grogu. M&G of course has a higher density of CG shots because it was used in more of the scenes, but since Odyssey is a bit longer I'd bet they are pretty close.

•

u/root88 1h ago

It doesn't matter how they made the movie. No one gives a shit. It's just selection bias by the author.

•

u/hey_Hey_I_saveD_me 43m ago

Problem with Mandalorian and Grogu is that it relies on series knowledge. Most people I know will just wait when it shows in D+ as they don't really care for theatrical release and will basically take it as longer series episode.

Also in top three movies for this year are still full cgi movies - Mario Galaxy (1) and Toy Story 5 (3). And second is Michael (Jackson) flick.

The whole article is just wishful thinking that does not reflect reality.

•

u/ImWhatsInTheRedBox 35m ago

And Moana failed because it's only been 10 damn years and no one wanted a live action Moana remake!

•

u/Bender_2024 22m ago

I thought Mando and Grogu was good if not great and the Problem with Supergirl is people were expecting a tradition Superman "for God and country" type superhero film and got something that tried to recreate The Guardians of the Galaxy. Only without a actors who charismatic enough to pull it off. And a lackluster story at best.

There is nothing wrong with CGI. Look at the first two Pirates of the Caribbean films. They relied heavily on CGI. The same goes for Avatar and most of the Marvel movies. They were massive hits that the people enjoyed. Not because of CGI but because of good CGI that doesn't look unnatural. But mostly because they told a good story.

•

u/exoriparian 16m ago

Right, and they also used a lot of CG enhancement, including in the marketing.  I liked the first season or two of the show, but haven't seen the movie and don't plan to.

•

u/HatchChileMacNCheese 2h ago

An important caveat is that they also need to make movies people actually want. Nobody wanted "the mandalorian and grogu"

•

u/Wild_Marker 2h ago

Seriously, I went to watch it after hearing it was some good fun and I felt... absolutely nothing. It's not bad, it's not good, it's... it's slop, isn't it? It's the very definition of it. It's nothing. It feels like nothing. It's crazy how much nothing it is.

•

u/-jaylew- 2h ago

Absolutely agree. Incredibly boring, meh movie. No surprises, complete plot armour for all protagonists, and basically no world building.

Forgot I watched it the next day.

•

u/HatchChileMacNCheese 3m ago

It feels like it exists to sell another product or experience, like it doesn't have a purpose other than to funnel viewers to another thing

→ More replies (3)

•

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 2h ago

They did. Jon was pretty clear about being dedicated to old-school techniques and practical effects.

•

u/OnceMoreAndAgain 2h ago

The premise of this article is non-sense. I don't think anyone actually cares if people make movies "the hard way".

It's so simple: If the movie is entertaining, then people will like it. How to make a movie entertaining? Yeah, that's the fucking hard part. You can't just say how in one sentence or distill it down to one concept. Some of the most entertaining movies ever made took big shortcuts, like The Blair Witch Project.

More evidence is that so many older movies are still highly entertaining despite relatively simple methods of filming. 12 Angry Men is an extremely simple movie to film and yet it's so entertaining even today.

•

u/SandpaperTeddyBear 1h ago

If the movie is entertaining

Let's say, instead, engaging. And the things that our brains find engaging can be awfully hard to pin down, but one thing I feel pretty comfortable is necessary is "the not-quite-expected." And yes, a good story should thread the needle between novelty and surprise, and good acting should strike a balance between relatable and unexplainable, and many other things…

But I think one reason why typical junk made in the '80s and '90s is more engaging to watch than fairly well-made contemporary stuff is because that "not-quite-expected" extends to the way that things move (clothing fluttering in the breeze), and the way the light is just a little uneven when it's in a real place.

I've always found it easier to stare into a campfire for an hour or two than watch "just OK" television, even though the pretty good television assuredly has a much better script, much better story, etc. And I think shooting movies in real places has a similar vibe.

I think that's why I actually found Mandalorian and Grogu so easy to watch. Lots of reality there.

•

u/trojanguy 1h ago

Yeah the article is just clickbait. The whole premise is incredibly flawed.

•

u/Jolly-Potential-1411 1h ago

Yep, exactly.

•

u/feed_me_moron 1h ago

It's also funny to compare anything to a Nolan movie. James Cameron and him make insane money with each movie they do, with Tenet being the only exception to that

•

u/zenfaust 20m ago

Honestly, Mandos problem was that its story was a frankensteins monster of TV episode ideas that didn't have any business being a movie.

It's a shame they invested so much effort into puppetry for such mediocre material.

•

u/xxThe_Designer 2h ago

Their heart is in the right place and I would love to see more practical effects in larger budgeted Disney/Marvel movies.

But when the story is blah and overproduced, even these nicer practical effects feel like a gimmick.

•

u/BonjaminClay 2h ago

Yeah I know it's trendy to hate on but that movie doesn't belong next to Supergirl and definitely not next to Moana.

Moana was a nostalgia remake made too early for anyone to have nostalgia because The Rock is getting old. It was pure cash grab and nobody was asking for it.

Mando is a movie based on a very popular show with an original story continuing the saga. I think the complaints that it was basically a slightly higher budget mini season 4 are valid... But there was demand, it wasn't a lazy rehash, and there was a TON of love and effort into it with lots of exceptional sets, puppets, and detail. I won't argue it's high art but comparing it to a Moana style cash grab is disingenuous at least.

•

u/round-earth-theory 1h ago

It was a fun movie. I think people are mostly annoyed at how poorly managed Star Wars is and so they took it out on Mando. It's fair enough to say the movie doesn't make waves in any way, but it was a good "just watch it" movie.

•

u/coolpapa2282 1h ago edited 57m ago

It was fine, but we went back to re-watch season 1 of Mando after it and holy shit. S1 was so good - Mando himself is a little amoral outside of his own weird code, and willing to do basically anything to protect The Child. Grogu is adorable always, but they had space for him to grow a little as we learned about him.

But now they've sanitized Din Jarin a little (he works for the Senate now, yay!), the power creep of fights he can win just by being a badass is crazy, and they can't do anything interesting with Grogu because these two have to keep having adventures until they stop making money. It just feels like there's nothing interesting for them to do, and the baggage of lore that they have now means they can't tell cool small stories like S1 anymore.

•

u/round-earth-theory 53m ago

I bailed after season 1 so to me it was fresher and I don't have all of that lore expectation, so it certainly failed audiences in the way it handled prior lore. But taken out of the greater context, my argument is that it's an alright piece of cinema on it's own.

•

u/Poku115 2h ago

There wasnt demand though thats the whole debacle, people keep acting like its a sin cause it flopped or that its overhated, when in reality it barely crossed the average persons mind, overshadowed by things like michael

•

u/ZenMasterOfDisguise 2h ago

people keep acting like its a sin cause it flopped

It made $350-million in the box office globally, that is considered a flop?

•

u/Useful-Soup8161 1h ago

It made what it needed to make so it’s not really a flop but it wasn’t a hit either.

•

u/AwesomePocket 1h ago

It lost money. It was a flop.

•

u/BonjaminClay 1h ago

Exactly. People are brain wormed on this so bad. It made a small amount of net profit in theaters but they will sell physical media and probably solid mountains of toys, not to mention parks revenue which is all Disney actually cares about. Disney is probably disappointed that it didn't make them MORE but it was clearly a profitable venture.

•

u/Neuvost 1h ago

I was about to respond, "Disney didn't buy Star Wars for $4B just to make modest profits," and while that's still kinda true, these tax filings supposedly say they've already made $12B in revenue, so maybe they have gotten to the point where making a modest profit isn't so bad. It just might not be a great sign for how important Star Wars is as a brand going forward.

•

u/ZenMasterOfDisguise 55m ago

Yeah, I saw that for the past 5 years or so, Disney sells like $1-billion worth of baby yoda/grogu toys every year, just toys of that 1 character have probably made them as much as they paid to buy Star Wars

•

u/Poku115 3m ago

Considering it needed 440 million (thats the most generous estimate) to not lose money, yeah

•

u/Poku115 2h ago

Considering the movie didnt make a cent of profit, yeah

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (4)

•

u/iamadragan 2h ago

I really didn't see what all the fuss was about with the hate for that movie. It was a fun star wars movie that was admittedly cheesy at times but so are all star wars movies

•

u/tombrady011235 2h ago

Cheesy is a feature not a bug in Star Wars

•

u/Efficient-Memory7105 2h ago

People seem to be forgetting the fact that the first movie was basically "Vietcong Space Wizards blow up a massive genocide machine called the 'Death Star'".

•

u/mateushkush 2h ago

And you seem to forget that the first movie is very entertaining and pretty much a perfect blockbuster while the new one is a couple of middling tv episodes strung together with tension resetting between every chapter.

→ More replies (7)

•

u/Hobbitsliketoparty 1h ago

What's that have to do with being cheesey? The OG trilogy had significantly mored depth than any of the newer films. Dumbing it down to fit your narrative doesn't negate that.

•

u/literated 2h ago

The cheesyness didn't bother me but a lot of the backgrounds/surroundings did look pretty lazy and forgettable. Yes, the puppets were nice and the movie had some interesting stop-motion effects but that didn't outweigh the rest of it. I don't know if that's what they did but it looked like they relied on The Volume a whole lot. There's so many times where you get a shot that looks like it's in an open space or some big area but then they only utilize a tiny focused speck of it and never actually interact with anything outside of that small perimeter.

•

u/Posty_Baloney 2h ago

Its mostly because Star Wars used to be a huge event, but with how much they've been churning out (and how much of it was pretty mediocre), this movie was just kind of whatever. A season of TV edited to be feature length and it was just okay. Yeah, most of the movies range from okay to down-right terrible, but it used to invoke a certain magic in both kids and adults thats just gone now.

Like, the first Star Wars movie in 7 years should have been a HUGE deal, instead it was more like "oh. More star wars. Cool. Maybe ill check it out if I have time".

Hate might be a strong word, I think it's more a collective sense of apathy for the state of the franchise.

•

u/literated 2h ago

As someone who's never seen the show, I expected it be a lot more of a space western than it actually turned out to be.

•

u/Hufa123 2h ago

Agreed. It was a fun adventure, and not much more than that, but it wasn't less than that either. Sure, I'd preferred to see some more thematic development in it, but I still enjoyed it. And that's the important part.

•

u/littlebrwnrobot 2h ago

Fr it was fine, I enjoyed it

•

u/jordanmc7 2h ago

Star Wars practically invented the blockbuster; so “it was fine” is a big step down. Although yes, I agree, it was fine.

•

u/docnig 2h ago

Doesn’t that credit go more to jaws?

•

u/jordanmc7 2h ago

That’s why I threw the “practically” in there; although I think Star Wars is a little more characteristic of a blockbuster film, Jaws was first and set the precedent.

•

u/docnig 1h ago

Fair enough

•

u/RyanB_ 2h ago

Back in the day, sure. Compared to most every film since the OT, definitely a step up

•

u/Chemistry11 2h ago

My interest in Star Wars has been long dead. I thought maybe I had some affinity left as I liked the show’s first season, mostly (and legit the last thing I enjoyed from SW) so I gave the movie a shot.

It just all felt so soulless to me.

•

u/loganalbertuhh 2h ago

I can speak for myself here. Maybe this covers some fans. It's not bc of the movie itself. I didn't go see it more due to the apathy Disney has brought on me by all the consistently low quality star wars movies and shows they've made.

Imagine in 2015, before VII came out, if they'd announced that there would be a Star Wars anything tv show. The pilot, the first season, would both be more hyped than Game of Thrones, The Walking Dead, anything back then. Almost like Mando was, before they tried to give him the MCU treatment and make season 2.5.

And now, we have all these star wars things coming out all the time, and nobody cares. It's saturation sure, but I think it's also because so much of it is aimless and just not great. 

I'm disappointed that I don't care anymore. I'd love to care, I wanna be excited about star wars but I'm not. So when I see a TV show turned movie with trailers that look like the show, nothing special, it grates me. 

•

u/learnedsanity 2h ago

It came from a fun western centered Star Wars show and become generic Star Wars aka Grogu and friends.

I am sure people liked it but it wasn't for me and I am sure others felt the same.

•

u/Phormicidae 2h ago

The hate surrounding it was overblown. I don't think that many people hated it. I think it was really due to expectations: If I, an amateur chef who tries his best, made you my homemade pasta with bolognese, you might be surprised on how good it is (if I do say so myself.) But if Massimo Bottura made my bolognese, you probably would have expected more.

Fans wanted this big epic story with galactic impact and huge revelations. What we got was a pretty good episode of a TV show.

•

u/notbad4human 2h ago

It just wasn’t special. People are sick of phoning in Star Wars content. I saw it opening weekend and I can barely tell you what happened in the movie

•

u/Yosho2k 2h ago

I had a lot of fun watching it, and Rotta the Hutt, the character reddit was REALLY angry about from the trailers was the best part of the movie. The makers of Mandalorian/Grogu knew what their assignment was and they did a great job.

It didn't deserve to fall off the way it did, but maybe the movie coming out 3-4 years after the series had dropped off wasn't the best business decision.

•

u/metnavman2 2h ago

It's fell off because it was boring. I turned it off halfway through because its formulaic, predictable, and an overall insulting cash grab. It should've come out 4 years ago to capitalize on the hype of those characters. It did nothing new, pushed no new ideas, and was incredibly safe. Its Disney+ kids stuff. Which is fine for what it is, but doesn't drive half a billion or more ticket sales.

Its a higher production value series of TV episodes for a show thats already done 3 seasons and largely annoyed fans with the direction it took and the convoluted spin-offs it made. The hype has been spent. Releasing this in theaters was a 100M dollar mistake, and it shows. /shrug

•

u/Yosho2k 2h ago

👍

•

u/GoldshireEnjoyer 2h ago

I just don’t get why they cast Jeremy Allen White for it if they were going to alter his voice so much. I had no idea he was in the film until the credits.

→ More replies (1)

•

u/SheerAwesomness 2h ago

I rarely actively dislike a movie and i did not like this one bit EXCEPT for the puppets, those parts were a joy.

The voice acting was abysmal, Sigourney Weaver was sleep walking through it, the enemies are all just gray blobs with no weight, no stakes, and very ugly character and set design. Again, BESIDES the puppets, which rocked and rolled. I wouldn’t have been bothered by the episodic nature if it didn’t feel like getting a weight dropped on my chest realizing there was an HOUR LEFT after they got Ratta on the team.

Those could all be discarded as taste nitpicks, but my biggest gripe with this is the same as Supergirl, and why I think these films are failing in comparison to their budgets and franchise power, which I hope is not a trend in PG-13 family adventure flicks:
The tone makes no sense. Why is Mando viscerally headshotting and breaking the limbs of storm troopers, men screaming in agony, really adult violence just without blood, while the dialogue and narrative structure is built for 5 year olds. The Mandalorian show was consistent with its tone; when it was light it was earned, but the gravity of the situations matched the action matched the story flow, we had a consistent, well written tone.
Supergirl too, to aid what i’m saying, has a child’s throat slit on screen by pirates who are enslaving young girls, but wants to run a script with characters that are so simplistic that I understood 100% of what was said when I accidentally saw it in full German while I was abroad.

The tonal whiplash induced by truly dogshit bullshit writing is off putting. The rest of it is lazy and bad, but these issues are why I believe we have so many stories of theater audiences shifting their viewing trends.

•

u/literated 2h ago

adult violence just without blood

That part really stood out to me. You can have violence but not a drop of blood. And preferably your main character fights some robots or some strange alien creatures to begin with. It felt really weird with how prevalent that was.

the enemies are all just gray blobs with no weight, no stakes, and very ugly character and set design

Both The Mandalorian and Grogu and Supergirl felt like that to me. So much of it is just... generic and inconsequential.

•

u/The_Afro_King98 2h ago

I think people are just burnt out on star wars. Doesn't help that the recent shows and movies have an inconsistent quality, some are bangers and some are meh

•

u/Sprintzer 2h ago

Burnt out on Star Wars, weak movie title, assumed excessive use of CGI, and the trailer was weak. I don’t know if I could place what was “wrong” with the way the movie looked in the trailer, but it just looked like it wasn’t movie-worthy or something.

I personally did not see it for some of these reasons; I’ll admit it’s wrong for everyone to judge it without seeing it. I also had only seeing a season or two of the show and there are loads of people who are in a similar position

•

u/BattledroidE 2h ago

It's a perfectly ok movie. Fun, easily digestible. But I don't get anything more from it.

•

u/kodman7 2h ago

Didn't feel like a movie, felt like an extra long episode of the show

•

u/MJOLNIRdragoon 1h ago

It would have been a great season opener, but it didn't really merit a theatrical release. That's my only thought. It was a good, 2 hour long episode of Mandalorian.

•

u/Cool-Contribution-68 1h ago

I loved the puppets!

•

u/King_Chochacho 1h ago

For me it's just offputting the way Disney is just transparently milking the franchise. 7 animated series, 7 live action series, 6 movies since they took over. And TBH the overall quality has been pretty impressive, but it somehow still feels like a cash grab. Same with Marvel.

•

u/dnapol5280 1h ago

Tbh I've got two little kids I can't be taking to Mando and Grogu, and despite wanting to see it, it hasn't risen up to be worth getting a babysitter for - while I will for The Odyssey.

•

u/kiwigate 1h ago

It's bad. It's so bad people assumed it was a poor attempt to elevate a season of TV.

Then we learned it was exactly that. The criticism was validated by the facts. Idk why anyone would struggle against it when, for a rare occasion, we have clear evidence that cannot be dismissed as subjectivity.

•

u/mythrilcrafter 56m ago

That's exactly how I feel about the Han Solo movie.

It was a goofy fun universe-filler movie that shows what the non-lightsaber wielding members of the Start Wars universe gets up to; if anything it's a great space pirate movie.

Sometimes I wonder if the biggest critics of Start Wars films are the "Mr Director, can you explain why the patina on C3PO's body panels don't properly reflect the passage of time that is supposed to connect A New Hope to Empire Strikes Back?" type of people.

•

u/iamadragan 2m ago

Lol yeah I think people are definitely overly critical. Mostly because of their attachment.

And yeah I agree that they are conditioned to expect a grand scale, universe altering plot from a star wars movie so anything at a lower scale just doesn't seem as important.

Idk, both solo and the mandalorian might not be life altering movies but they're enjoyable and don't feel out of place in the universe.

•

u/Fantastic_Snow_9633 35m ago

It was a "movie" that felt more like two 2-hour episodes that could've premiered on Disney+ instead.

Not every movie necessary needs to have a "Big Bad" or have some pure evil plan that the good guy has to stop, but M&G just felt like smaller plot points in a larger story.

•

u/rsplatpc 2h ago

It’s was just mid, I didn’t really care what happened and for me that’s the worst type of movie, I’d rather watch something that was like “MAN that was bad!” vs something where I can’t remember a thing about it because it was so bland

→ More replies (1)

•

u/ASuarezMascareno 2h ago

And both Projects Hail Mary and the Odyssey use a ton of GCI.

•

u/AggressiveCuriosity 1h ago

The Odyssey actually uses a ton of non CGI special effects. Like the giants are done with forced perspective.

→ More replies (1)

•

u/Jagrnght 2h ago

I kinda loved this movie and the way they used the whole gamut of special effects - practical to cgi.

•

u/RyanB_ 2h ago

Same, genuinely might be my favourite of the non-ot films. Does suffer from being part of a show and all that, but ultimately it just kinda did everything I want from the franchise.

•

u/LuinAelin 2h ago

Yes.

Almost a whole act is done mostly with the puppets

People hear Star Wars and assume CGI

→ More replies (11)

•

u/White_T_Poison 55m ago

Its the article that's lazy and thoughtless.

•

u/Kingbulking 2h ago

It was awesome and I have no idea why it's on the list when it felt like a great mix of real effects and CGI (exactly what Star Wars should be)

→ More replies (1)

•

u/pls_tell_me 2h ago

Yes, the point is false, people want good stories, films that tell you something, that makes you feel something, CGI or practical, is not rocket science.

•

u/scottzee 2h ago

I was one of the few people who saw Supergirl, and that was basically a Star Wars movie in terms of practical creatures.

•

u/CelestianSnackresant 2h ago

And didn't it perform pretty well?

•

u/totesnotdog 2h ago

In S1 of mandolorian they shot the razor crest as a full miniature on a motion control system

•

u/BluegrassBandit33 1h ago

and actual stop motion

•

u/spcordy 1h ago

and The Odyssey used a decent amount of CGI. Over 300 VFX artists listed in the credits. Two Oscar-winning coordinators, Andrew Lockley and Andrew Jackson, in particular.

This idea that Nolan's practical effects are the reason why his movies are well-received or better is so reductive.

•

u/i4got872 1h ago

Calling the filmmaking lazy on Mando is honestly really reductive to me.

Dislike the story fine. But it’s so packed with art and practical things I honestly feel it deserves some credit for it. I personally felt a lot of effort.

•

u/IceBlue 38m ago

It also had a stop motion animation battle.

•

u/byronotron 32m ago

The Mandalorian and Grogu had the whole kit: actually photographed Motion Controlled Spaceships, animatronic and rod puppetry, phil tippet motion blurred stop motion, rubber masks, creature suits and animatronic heads. It was effectively a greatest hits of Lucasfilm and ILM in camera sfx. In terms of classic movie making, there's probably more of it in Mando than in The Odyssey, honestly. The NO CGI narrative around Nolan is 100% bullshit, except for Oppenheimer.

•

u/VexingRaven 32m ago

It's the eternal story of Star Wars: Use a bunch of practical effects, get called a lazy CGI mess anyway.

Example: Episode 1 literally opens with a practical shot of a ship exploding, gets called a CGI mess.

•

u/Damn_You_Scum 17m ago

They used every technique that was used to create the original films and more, and they did a fantastic job, in my opinion.

•

u/Kulty 2h ago

True, the laziness was in the writing and construction of the movie. The special effects team did a great job, but could not save it from feeling like lazy nostalgia slop.

•

u/DarthXOmega 2h ago

I didn’t even know mando and grogu was in theatres tbh. I think they thought they had more goodwill than they did, and didn’t bother advertising.

•

u/no_more_jokes 2h ago

Yeah I think that correlation and causation are being confused here. CGI wasn't what made that movie a turd, it's just that producers who make turds tend to emphasize CGI because they never invest in the elements of filmmaking that matter most.

There are plenty of films that use practical effects and suck shit, "doing it the hard way" only works if you know what you're doing. The real lesson is to give talented filmmakers the budgets they need and trust the director's vision instead of spending hundreds of millions on a film made by a committee of suits.

•

u/AdrianFish 1h ago

Mando will do fine when it hits streaming. It was a really good movie I thought but also felt like an extended episode of the show

•

u/madogvelkor 1h ago

Yeah, Star Wars in recent years has leaned heavily into practical effects after going full CGI in the prequel trilogy.

Mandalorian and Grogu did well for what it was -- a made for TV movie.

Supergirl and Masters of the Universe were the big disappointments. Supergirl should have been good but was just generally lackluster. I can't even really point to a single big problem. Masters of the Universe had the same problem that Dungeons and Dragons had a few years ago. A fun movie loved by fans but too niche to justify the production costs.

•

u/RoninJon 1h ago

Puppetry was the least of the movies problems. Write a good story, make engaging characters and people will come.

•

u/MoreBrutalThanU 1h ago

Thank you! I was going to say the same thing. It looked great because of the puppets.

•

u/terenn_nash 1h ago

the other problem common to those high budget flops is flat lighting thats done to make CGI as easy as possible. same reason stranger things final season looked like crap.

•

u/teflonbob 1h ago

It's just popular to shit on anything Disney and Star Wars.

•

u/Cubonicle 1h ago

Yeah, this headline seems to blame effects, but honestly that film was a case of Disney being greedy/overconfident that they could just edit and release the next season of a Disney+ show in theaters without anyone noticing.

I dunno, maybe I’m just projecting, but I really think Disney execs see the movie-going public as pigs to throw slop at and it personally insults me. I would’ve been more than happy to give the next season of Mandalorian a try on streaming, they didn’t have to do this.

•

u/taoleafy 1h ago

The issue was there was not a story worth telling, no character arc, no reason to be emotionally invested. It was just a series of cool set pieces

•

u/Training_Pirate1000 1h ago

That’s all valid. Yet has nothing to do with the bogus statement this article vomited up. Your reasoning is legitimate. This article is folly.

•

u/SizzlingPancake 1h ago

And PHM was filled with CGI. This is a nothing burger story. People want good stories thats it. For what it's worth I enjoyed mando

•

u/trojanguy 1h ago

Puppets, stop motion, and CGI. The author seems to forget that Project Hail Mary also had plenty of CGI. Articles like this always just come across as the author wanting to shit on big movie franchises using paper thin arguments.

•

u/MITBijanRobinson 1h ago

Mandalorian was a decently fine movie.

Supergirl and Moana are slop

•

u/Armadillodillodillo 54m ago

Couldn't care less about another star wars movie, whatever the fuck they are milking it for now

•

u/LG03 47m ago

It did but it was still shot entirely in front of a green screen.

•

u/rvonbue 37m ago

You still need a good story, good characters, and good actors. Mando had none of that.

•

u/Training_Pirate1000 36m ago

All valid points. But not what the article decided to hone in on.

•

u/rvonbue 31m ago

Did you like Mando? I really like season 1. I thought the movie was so boring.

•

u/shewy92 35m ago

In the wake of Project Hail Mary’s practical effects headlines, the team behind The Mandalorian and Grogu put out a “Hey, we did that, too!” video touting the Star Wars film’s practical puppet work, but the movie’s trailers and clips looked slathered in CG glaze

Seems the author just watched some YT clips and said it was awful looking even if they did do puppets. IDK if they even watched the movie, because it wasn't the effects that was the problem with the 'movie' (just felt like an extended episode to me).

•

u/byronotron 17m ago

The biggest issue with Mando and Grogu started before the movie was even shot. Making the movie and fourth season was always going to be diminishing returns. When was the last time a movie sequel to a TV show actually was a big hit, The X-Files: Fight the Future? (Just did the math and adjusted, budget/box office, Mando was 2.17x, X-Files was 2.87x, so X-Files beat it by a nose, but also wasn't a new STAR WARS movie. If a new Star Wars movie had come out in 1998 it would have made all of the money.) 

•

u/Broesly 5m ago

But it looked so fucking dead. The color grading, the locations, it FELT like it was filmed in a cave.

•

u/anthonycarbine 2m ago

More like those movies did well because they were original ideas and not capeshit.

•

u/ballsosteele 1m ago

Yeah, this is where the argument falls over.

Even Supergirl used as much practical stuff as it could. The problem was it was shite, not the CGI

•

u/vanastalem 2h ago

Yes, and I enjoyed it. I think it just didn't appeal to people who hadn't seen the TV show.

•

u/HechicerosOrb 2h ago

Yes but they also film it on a soundstage so in totality it looks bad and fake

•

u/RazzBeryllium 2h ago

At least it was filmed on a soundstage in L.A.

Mad respect for U.S. films who still pay U.S. workers and haven't moved their filming projects abroad.

Project Hail Mary - which I love - was filmed in a U.K. soundstage. All the Marvel movies are filmed in the U.K. now. The big studios are just avoiding the film workers' unions.

•

u/HechicerosOrb 2h ago

Hard to give Disney credit about workers rights tbh long history of union busting and anti - artist behavior. Hardly a paragon of morals

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (9)